Interview with Wags

Oooo, we're getting a full fidelity F-15C next ;)

 

'The Phantom is such a legendary aircraft that we will certainly simulate it. For now, we already have another aircraft (an EAGLEy awaited one) to work on after the Viper.'

Or this implies we will two F-15 versions in dcs.

Wait a minute, isn't Razbam doing the F-15 eagle already?

Or this implies we will two F-15 versions in dcs.

No.Razbam's working on the F-15E Strike Eagle.

The current discussion is about whether or not ED would ever develop a full-fidelity F-15C.

No.Razbam's working on the F-15E Strike Eagle.

 

 

The current discussion is about whether or not ED would ever develop a full-fidelity F-15C.

You never can tell though but I personally would prefer to have the mudhen(eagle version) compare to the C version.

Okay I get it. If Razbam pushes out the F-15Eagle, I think there would be little incentive for ED to do a full fidelity F-15C IMHO.

You never can tell though but I personally would prefer to have the mudhen(eagle version) compare to the C version.

A singular focused aircraft like the F-15C would be nice. As we’ve seen with the Hornet and Viper multirole stuff takes a lot of time to get done. Plus the Hornet/Viper have enough multirole already.

A singular focused aircraft like the F-15C would be nice. As we’ve seen with the Hornet and Viper multirole stuff takes a lot of time to get done. Plus the Hornet/Viper have enough multirole already.

AMEN! Bring us the F-15C. :thumbup:

You could make the educated assumption that ED have another 4th gen fighter lined up after the Viper. I mean, the Hornet and the Viper must generate the most interest in the customer base, so I don’t see why ED would not have a third fast mover lined up. We could deduce that it is the F-15C because they have already completed the flight model, perhaps some of systems based off the FC3. Its a hugely popular plane, less weapons systems and capabilities to create. Finally, we can probably rule out a MiG-29 or Su-27, and out of the big 4 US fourth gen, only the Eagle isn’t full fidelity. Also Wags likes puns and wordplay ;)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also Wags likes puns and wordplay ;)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like your thoughts and optimism, but I wouldn't necessarily call the use of the word "eagerly" a pun or word-play. Happy to be wrong, though. :)

You could make the educated assumption that ED have another 4th gen fighter lined up after the Viper. I mean, the Hornet and the Viper must generate the most interest in the customer base, so I don’t see why ED would not have a third fast mover lined up. We could deduce that it is the F-15C because they have already completed the flight model, perhaps some of systems based off the FC3. Its a hugely popular plane, less weapons systems and capabilities to create. Finally, we can probably rule out a MiG-29 or Su-27, and out of the big 4 US fourth gen, only the Eagle isn’t full fidelity. Also Wags likes puns and wordplay ;)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah or you might read the tea leaves that its actually a Russian plane too. Those have been the most eagerly awaited modules for quite some time and perhaps, they "solved" whatever mystery issue they had and wouldn't talk about. Look at the Kiowa for example, it was an open secret within the developer community, but they couldn't say anything until they had a deal with manufacturer or "almost" had one, and it looks pretty far along. Could be a similar thing with the Mig/sukhoi which I think many people would rather see than the F15C, at least in order of priorities. Anyhow its all conjecture.

I would be overjoyed with a full fat flanker variant. Preferably o e of the later multirole ones, like a Su-27SM or Su-30MKx.

Different strokes for different folks they say.

I am not really eager for any new aircraft module. I have got enough aircraft in my hangar that still needs to be finished.

I would relish a significant work and released results for dcs core systems like an organic campaign, AI, ATC communication, weather and gaming engine improvements (to impart game play especially VR).

Those core systems would sell Ed's and 3rd party modules faster.

Glad to hear their committment in this respect and I hope half the staff strenght allotted to these areas would yield a timely results.

What do they mean by "improved unit visibility"? Do they want to improve the visibility of aircraft? That would be a very important fix. Also the LOD needs fixing. E.g. there is a bug that makes the afterburner graphics of aircraft disappear, when you zoom out too much.

I would be overjoyed with a full fat flanker variant. Preferably o e of the later multirole ones, like a Su-27SM or Su-30MKx.

Yeah, you aren't the only one. So thats my .02c take on wags "eagerly" anticipated wording.

So thats my .02c take

All I wanted to read in that was ‘we understand that our release of the F16 was not as good as it should have been, and that by moving developers off the hornet after we said it wouldn’t be effected, we disappointed a large element of our community, due to our poor communications. We’re *sorry* that we have caused frustration and apologise.

Going forwards we will ensure the Hornet is finished with alacrity, and thereafter always be clear which plane/system has which order of precedence and will make sure that EA access timeframes are clearly communicated before accepting any money from you.’

The ‘thank you for your patience and understanding’ that keeps getting tacked on to Hornet comms has got to the point for me where I read it as patronising.

I am yet to see ANY member of ED actually say the hardest word. Sorry.

Would be a nice gesture if they did.

Yeah or you might read the tea leaves that its actually a Russian plane too. Those have been the most eagerly awaited modules for quite some time and perhaps, they "solved" whatever mystery issue they had and wouldn't talk about.

Wags has actually talked at some length in other recent interviews (that I can’t be bothered to look up right now) about how ED will not be developing full fidelity 4th gen Russian fighters in the foreseeable future. It’s not a mystery: the developers are based in Russia. Russian government says “no”. It’s perfectly possible that that situation has changed in the last 6-12 months but I find it highly unlikely.

Wags has actually talked at some length in other recent interviews (that I can’t be bothered to look up right now) about how ED will not be developing full fidelity 4th gen Russian fighters in the foreseeable future. It’s not a mystery: the developers are based in Russia. Russian government says “no”. It’s perfectly possible that that situation has changed in the last 6-12 months but I find it highly unlikely.

I've seen it.

They say there are "issues". ED has never flat out said what those were. There's all sorts of prognostication and BS about the Russian government. But if thats the case, why let 3rd parties develop these and integrate them into DCS? Which they did say was possible.How is that the least bit different from the "the Russian government" perspective? Most likely IMO is that they decided the cost vs benefit analysis wasn't there for ED relative to easier/more profitable western fighters. That or equally likely is a licensing issue IMO. For whatever reason they seem to have an "in" or good relationship with the russian Helo makers Kamov and Mil, but not mig or shukhoi.

Anyhow, just my .02 cents. I'm happy either if they do a modern mig or the F4E. Since both with address the current plane set balance issues. The modern mig would be nicer IMO since there is a big focus on modern blue forces. Or the F4E will be the classical competitor for the mig19/21/23.

Your 2 one hundredths of a cent.:P

Exactly what you paid for it even ;)

They say there are "issues". ED has never flat out said what those were.

They've been pretty vague about it indeed. I do remember Chizh saying somewhere on the Russian forum that they expect a full-fidelity Russian jet to not sell that well compared to a Western one from the same era, and that that is one of the reasons they won't pursue it.

Even more reason to develop a full-fidelity F-15C: the FM is already there, so it should be relatively easy to make, especially compared to more complex multi-role fighters.

They've been pretty vague about it indeed. I do remember Chizh saying somewhere on the Russian forum that they expect a full-fidelity Russian jet to not sell that well compared to a Western one from the same era, and that that is one of the reasons they won't pursue it.

Even more reason to develop a full-fidelity F-15C: the FM is already there, so it should be relatively easy to make, especially compared to more complex multi-role fighters.

I've heard that as well, and maybe they have some data to back that up. But I just don't believe it. Full-fi redfor aircraft IMO is one of the most in-demand aircraft. But I think its probably more than 1 singular reason.

I've seen it.

Then it isn't really a mystery, is it?

They say there are "issues". ED has never flat out said what those were. There's all sorts of prognostication and BS about the Russian government.

No, Wags has never said verbatim "The Russian government won't let us". But saying, and I paraphrase because I'm not spending any more time on this, "Our development team is based in Russia and because of that we're under certain restrictions. We won't be developing modern Russian fighters in the foreseeable future," is about as close as you're gonna get. I don't call that vague or "prognostication and BS".

Are the details more nuanced than that? I'm sure they are.

Will you ever get to see the correspondence history and negotiations between ED and the interested parties in order to understand that nuance? Ha, no.

Would eastern aircraft be outsold by western aircraft? Almost certainly yes, but two things can be true at the same time.

ED has been more clear about it in the last year or so than they've ever been:

Russia-based development team = no full fidelity Russian fighters from ED.

To conspiracy theory about totally speculative alternative explanations at this point is kind of ridiculous.

Then it isn't really a mystery, is it?

 

No, Wags has never said verbatim "The Russian government won't let us". But saying, and I paraphrase because I'm not spending any more time on this, "Our development team is based in Russia and because of that we're under certain restrictions. We won't be developing modern Russian fighters in the foreseeable future," is about as close as you're gonna get. I don't call that vague or "prognostication and BS".

Are the details more nuanced than that? I'm sure they are.

Will you ever get to see the correspondence history and negotiations between ED and the interested parties in order to understand that nuance? Ha, no.

Would eastern aircraft be outsold by western aircraft? Almost certainly yes, but two things can be true at the same time.

ED has been more clear about it in the last year or so than they've ever been:

Russia-based development team = no full fidelity Russian fighters from ED.

To conspiracy theory about totally speculative alternative explanations at this point is kind of ridiculous.

So explain why a 3rd party can make it? It makes 0 sense, since the module would exist one way or the other.

So explain why a 3rd party can make it? It makes 0 sense, since the module would exist one way or the other.

Out of curiousity I checked websites for 3rd party developers and most of them don't seem to be Russia based. That would potentially give them more leeway than ED has, and it's quite plausible while developing it themselves might cause issues allowing it to exist within the DCS world might not matter to the powers that be. Completely speculation, but it's possible that something like just trying to gather info about the aircraft could cause suspicions/problems if done within Russia whereas someone doing it in another country might not be bothered. ED really has no reason to blame the government if it's just they don't feel it would make money or they didn't feel they could get the info they needed to make it.

So explain why a 3rd party can make it? It makes 0 sense, since the module would exist one way or the other.

Maybe it's not a problem that this module exist but the documents you have to have to create it. If you are in russia and have them = bad, if you are in a foreign country = no problem legally.

Just speculating here like all others :beer:

I guess on of the differences is likely physical access of whatever agency to ED offices in Russia and a 3rd party office someplace around the globe. If the company offices are just around the corner and in your legal jurisdiction...

Concerning investment recuperation. They could easily fathom real "money down" interest by sort of kickstart style pre-purchase (i know, not the right time atm). Simply annouce the project as possible if x number of copies can be sold. So everyone interested can buy it the usual way, but you don't get charged unless a certain amount of copies have been sold. That would actually be a good time to test out this pay half for EA, pay half on final release. If those numbers of 160.000 A-10C copies in 10 years, and 50.000ish for something like the Hornet in its first year are true (numbers from Hoggit), then i can very well imagine that if an expensive eastern 4th full fidelity module sold only half that, this might not be enough.

Is it theoretically possible for modders to make Russian mid fidelity aircraft cockpits clickable? It is just a matter of convenience for me.